<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (12) TMI 534 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254190</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because a registered dealer&#039;s invoice source is questioned, where the invoices are otherwise proper cenvatable documents and the Revenue fails to establish any alternative procurement source to dislodge the claim. The analysis relies on prior decisions and Rule 7(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002, together with a consistent view in similar matters involving the same dealer. On that basis, denial of credit was held unjustified, and the consequential penalty could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 07:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 534 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254190</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because a registered dealer&#039;s invoice source is questioned, where the invoices are otherwise proper cenvatable documents and the Revenue fails to establish any alternative procurement source to dislodge the claim. The analysis relies on prior decisions and Rule 7(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002, together with a consistent view in similar matters involving the same dealer. On that basis, denial of credit was held unjustified, and the consequential penalty could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>